CPATH-2026-0021 · Drone / autonomous systems

Phantom of the ADAS: Projected/Billboard Phantom Object Attacks on Tesla Autopilot and Mobileye

Two or more co-dominant consequence paths connect the public security record to a provisional CRITICAL consequence band.

Candidate bandCRITICAL
Co-dominant pathsDevice-control safety + Perception-to-action

These paths are co-dominant because each reaches the record's highest candidate band, CRITICAL; no array-order tie-break is applied.

Causal model

What has to happen for this consequence to hold?

2 candidate paths · explicit source, inference, and assumption boundaries.

Safety · Co-dominant path

Device-control safety

The demonstrated phantom object caused sudden automatic braking on a live road, creating credible rear-end collision or evasive-maneuver risk.

CRITICAL
  1. accessModel inference

    Proximity or local access

    The attacker needs optical line of sight from a nearby projector or digital billboard to the vehicle camera.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  2. boundaryModel inference

    Cross-domain authority chain

    The projected image crosses from the roadside environment into the vehicle camera and then into automatic braking.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  3. capabilityModel inference

    Severe therapy or actuation consequence

    The demonstrated phantom object caused sudden automatic braking on a live road, creating credible rear-end collision or evasive-maneuver risk.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  4. consequenceModel inference

    Device-control safety

    The demonstrated phantom object caused sudden automatic braking on a live road, creating credible rear-end collision or evasive-maneuver risk.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  5. recoveryOperational assumption

    Coordinated operational recovery

    Mitigation requires perception hardening and operational controls because no single firmware change removes every physical-world ambiguity.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

Decision rationale

Why this band?

The compact score is separated into the facts and judgments that produced it.

Reach and effort
ReachabilityRE 2
Proximity or local access

The attacker needs optical line of sight from a nearby projector or digital billboard to the vehicle camera.

Model inference
Execution complexityEC 4
Straightforward operation

The demonstrated attack places and times a phantom image with a commodity projector or digital billboard; it does not require vehicle code execution.

Model inference
ExposureEX 2
Access position limits exposure

The technique is easier to perform than it is to position against a target, so access is the constraining factor.

Model inference
Consequence
Physical / safetyPH 4
Severe therapy or actuation consequence

The demonstrated phantom object caused sudden automatic braking on a live road, creating credible rear-end collision or evasive-maneuver risk.

Model inference
Data / perceptionDP 4
Safety-driving perception or intimate data

The projected object corrupts the camera-derived road model that Autopilot uses to decide when to brake.

Model inference
AuthorityAT 2
Bounded function authority

Authority is indirect: the attacker does not gain privilege but coerces the vehicle's own control output via spoofed input — (influence over a bounded actuation, no signing and firmware and fleet-control root).

Model inference
Scale and recovery
ChainabilityCH 4
Cross-domain authority chain

The projected image crosses from the roadside environment into the vehicle camera and then into automatic braking.

Model inference
Reuse scaleSR 4
Shared fleet-wide primitive

Shared model-level perceptual weakness, fully portable.

Operational assumption
Execution scaleSX 3
Deployment-wide with setup

One phantom source affects all passing affected vehicles but needs per-location optical placement.

Operational assumption
Recovery burdenOR 3
Coordinated operational recovery

Mitigation requires perception hardening and operational controls because no single firmware change removes every physical-world ambiguity.

Operational assumption
Confidence and status
Evidence strengthEV 3
Reproduced or strongly report-backed

source citation pending public URL supports a reproduced or strongly report-backed condition; this registry still keeps consequence review separate from exploit confirmation.

Model inference
LivenessLS Mitigated
Vendor mitigation is recorded

The record treats the path as mitigated; the historical mechanism remains useful for review and regression analysis.

Operational assumption

Decision trail

How the final band follows

  1. Base bandCRITICAL
  2. No adjustment

    The CRITICAL base band remains final because no separate cap or systemic uplift applies. The demonstrated phantom object caused sudden automatic braking on a live road, creating credible rear-end collision or evasive-maneuver risk.

  3. Final candidate bandCRITICAL
Technical vector
Compact machine notationCPATH:1.0-candidate/TT:DEVICE_CONTROL_SAFETY/RE:2/EC:4/EX:2/PH:4/DP:4/AT:2/CH:4/SR:4/SX:3/OR:3/EV:3/LS:MITIGATEDRead the scoring method →

Perception · Co-dominant path

Perception-to-action

Projected or billboard phantom objects corrupt the camera-based world model, and the automated driving stack acts directly on the false object.

CRITICAL
  1. accessModel inference

    Proximity or local access

    Optical line-of-sight (projector and billboard within camera view) is proximity and local-physical-world positioning, not network —.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  2. boundaryModel inference

    Cross-domain authority chain

    As a reusable cross-domain bridge from environment manipulation to vehicle control.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  3. capabilityModel inference

    Safety-driving perception or intimate data

    Projected or billboard phantom objects corrupt the camera-based world model, and the automated driving stack acts directly on the false object.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  4. consequenceModel inference

    Perception-to-action

    Projected or billboard phantom objects corrupt the camera-based world model, and the automated driving stack acts directly on the false object.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

  5. recoveryOperational assumption

    Coordinated operational recovery

    No clean firmware patch removes the ambiguity.

    EvidenceNo direct citation — inspect the declared inference or assumption.

Decision rationale

Why this band?

The compact score is separated into the facts and judgments that produced it.

Reach and effort
ReachabilityRE 2
Proximity or local access

Optical line-of-sight (projector and billboard within camera view) is proximity and local-physical-world positioning, not network —.

Model inference
Execution complexityEC 4
Straightforward operation

Once optical line of sight is established, a consumer projector or millisecond-long billboard image can create the demonstrated phantom object.

Model inference
ExposureEX 2
Access position limits exposure

The technique is easier to perform than it is to position against a target, so access is the constraining factor.

Model inference
Consequence
Physical / safetyPH 4
Severe therapy or actuation consequence

A convincing phantom object can make the vehicle brake suddenly on a live road; the physical risk follows from the ADAS response to corrupted perception.

Model inference
Data / perceptionDP 4
Safety-driving perception or intimate data

Projected or billboard phantom objects corrupt the camera-based world model, and the automated driving stack acts directly on the false object.

Model inference
AuthorityAT 2
Bounded function authority

The projected image influences the perception pipeline but does not grant software, administrator, or vehicle-control authority.

Model inference
Scale and recovery
ChainabilityCH 4
Cross-domain authority chain

As a reusable cross-domain bridge from environment manipulation to vehicle control.

Model inference
Reuse scaleSR 4
Shared fleet-wide primitive

The perceptual ambiguity is shared across every vehicle of the affected model and software, fully portable, no per-vehicle secret.

Operational assumption
Execution scaleSX 3
Deployment-wide with setup

One billboard and projector hits many passing vehicles but requires per-site optical setup and line-of-sight, deployment-wide rather than fully fleet-remote and cloud.

Operational assumption
Recovery burdenOR 3
Coordinated operational recovery

No clean firmware patch removes the ambiguity.

Operational assumption
Confidence and status
Evidence strengthEV 3
Reproduced or strongly report-backed

source citation pending public URL supports a reproduced or strongly report-backed condition; this registry still keeps consequence review separate from exploit confirmation.

Model inference
LivenessLS Mitigated
Vendor mitigation is recorded

The record treats the path as mitigated; the historical mechanism remains useful for review and regression analysis.

Operational assumption

Decision trail

How the final band follows

  1. Base bandCRITICAL
  2. No adjustment

    The CRITICAL base band remains final because no separate cap or systemic uplift applies. Projected or billboard phantom objects corrupt the camera-based world model, and the automated driving stack acts directly on the false object.

  3. Final candidate bandCRITICAL
Technical vector
Compact machine notationCPATH:1.0-candidate/TT:PERCEPTION_TO_ACTION/RE:2/EC:4/EX:2/PH:4/DP:4/AT:2/CH:4/SR:4/SX:3/OR:3/EV:3/LS:MITIGATEDRead the scoring method →

Triage implication

Verify the safety transition before acting on the band.

Validate the deployment-specific transition from digital control or perception to physical action before setting remediation urgency.

Evidence ledger

Public sources used by this record.

At least one citation still lacks a public URL; that gap keeps this record provisional.

  • other
    source citation pending public URL

    source citation pending public URL · public URL pending

Published baseline

Keep exploit severity and consequence reasoning distinct.

RelationshipNo comparable score
Baseline confidencelow
Scored2026-06-03

No public baseline score is available for this case.

Original scorer notes

The source narrative behind the structured explanation.

Retained for provenance and historical review, not as the recommended way to understand the assessment.

Read the original scorer notes

Assessment

CFSE Consequence Paths assesses Phantom of the ADAS: Projected/Billboard Phantom Object Attacks on Tesla Autopilot and Mobileye at CRITICAL — the worst of 2 risk paths (safety, perception). The dominant consequence is influence over a safety-relevant actuation.

Vulnerability

Phantom of the ADAS: Projected/Billboard Phantom Object Attacks on Tesla Autopilot and Mobileye. Reported attack vector: Physical/optical line-of-sight (projector or compromised/leased digital billboard within camera view).

CFSE Consequence Paths analysis

The vulnerability is decomposed into one risk path per terminal consequence. Each path is scored on its exposure (reachability × execution complexity) and the authority, perception, and physical/safety it reaches, together with its scale of reuse, scale of execution, and recoverability.

DEVICE_CONTROL_SAFETYCRITICAL

CPATH:1.0-candidate/TT:DEVICE_CONTROL_SAFETY/RE:2/EC:4/EX:2/PH:4/DP:4/AT:2/CH:4/SR:4/SX:3/OR:3/EV:3/LS:MITIGATED

Exposure EX=2 (reachability-bound) · bands PH=CRITICAL · DP=CRITICAL · AT=ELEVATED → base CRITICAL → assessed CRITICAL.

Same positioning and execution as the perception path: proximity optical line-of-sight RE:2, trivial commodity projector/billboard EC:4. Terminal consequence here is the actuation itself — sudden unwarranted automatic braking on a live road, demonstrated on Tesla Model X HW2.5/HW3, with credible potential for rear-end collision or dangerous evasive maneuver — PH:4 (dangerous actuation / credible injury). DP:4 because the trigger is corruption of the safety-relevant camera world model, perception_feeds_action=true. Authority is indirect: the attacker does not gain privilege but coerces the vehicle’s own control output via spoofed input — AT:2 (influence over a bounded actuation, no signing/firmware/fleet-control root). Crosses optical/perception/actuation/safety boundaries — boundary_crossing=true, CH:4 reusable bridge. SR:4 shared model-level perceptual weakness, fully portable. SX:3 one phantom source affects all passing affected vehicles but needs per-location optical placement. OR:3 no single firmware fix; addressed via perception-model improvements, no recall/fleet reprovision required. EV:3 reproduced on production vehicles; LS MITIGATED; no in-the-wild exploitation.

PERCEPTION_TO_ACTIONCRITICAL

CPATH:1.0-candidate/TT:PERCEPTION_TO_ACTION/RE:2/EC:4/EX:2/PH:4/DP:4/AT:2/CH:4/SR:4/SX:3/OR:3/EV:3/LS:MITIGATED

Exposure EX=2 (reachability-bound) · bands PH=CRITICAL · DP=CRITICAL · AT=ELEVATED → base CRITICAL → assessed CRITICAL.

Optical line-of-sight (projector/billboard within camera view) is proximity/local-physical-world positioning, not network — RE:2. Once positioned, attack is trivial single-projection/commodity (consumer projector, ms-long billboard frame), minimal expertise — EC:4. The phantom corrupts the camera-based world model / object-detection input, the safety-relevant perception layer — DP:4, perception_feeds_action=true because the spoofed object directly drives autonomous braking/steering decisions. No software privilege gained; attacker abuses the legitimate perception-to-actuation pathway, inducing the ADAS to take its own bounded safety action — AT:2. Crosses physical/optical -> perception -> actuation/safety boundaries — boundary_crossing=true, CH:4 as a reusable cross-domain bridge from environment manipulation to vehicle control. SR:4: the perceptual ambiguity is shared across every vehicle of the affected model/software, fully portable, no per-vehicle secret. SX:3: one billboard/projector hits many passing vehicles but requires per-site optical setup and line-of-sight, deployment-wide rather than fully fleet-remote/cloud. OR:3: no clean firmware patch removes the ambiguity; mitigated via multi-network authenticity model improvements (GhostBusters) rather than a single fix or fleet reprovision. EV:3 reproduced on production Tesla Model X and Mobileye 630 PRO; LS MITIGATED; not known exploited in wild.

Published baseline

No public baseline score has been published for this finding. It belongs to a design-level harm class that is often outside published vulnerability-scoring coverage. The registry records the reachable consequence path for review.

Sources

  • source citation pending public URL

Related paths

Compare the boundary, not only the product.

Cite this entryCFSE Consequence Paths Registry 1.0-candidate, CPATH-2026-0021 (“Phantom of the ADAS: Projected/Billboard Phantom Object Attacks on Tesla Autopilot and Mobileye”), paths.cfse.ai/CPATH-2026-0021 (published 2026-06-03).